New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1887-06-04
SHARP JURORS APPROACHED.
MIR. MARITIME GIVES NAMES AND CIRCUM
STANCES.

A STATEMENT BY THE DEFENDANTS LAWYERS
DARING THE DISTRICT ATTORNEY TO ANSWER
AQUEsTIoN-AN INVESTIGATION Or
DERFD FOR MONDAY.
The trial Of Jacob Sharp fairly leaped into
intense activity yesterday the question OF
attempts to corrupt the jury. District Attorney
MARITIME presented to the court the charges that
the jury had been tampered with, which found
their way into print the day before The result
that certain jurors excused under peremptory
challenge are to be examined on Monday morning
before Justice Barrett and the whole matter
investigated That jurors have becn approached
by some one more persons Is evident. The
question now open is, under what influence and
with what object direct or reInftc. this done.
When the venerable ex-Judge Fullerton, the
concise and determined John f. Parsons, the
urbane and eloquent ex-senator Nelson, the watch
rIl and prudent Albert Stickney and their coadhi-
tors entered the Court of Oyer and Terminer
yesterday, it apparent from their settled
mien that something was in the air. After tho
names Of the fourteenth panel Of Jurors had been
called, Mr. Parsons tw1rled his eyeglasses in a
way highly significant to those who have watched
him work them, set his thin lips firmly than
ever, and then asked the Court the privilege Of
making a statement. He put 1t of, however, until
Mr. MARITIME should arrive. The District-Attorney
appeared soon after noon. Then once more NIr.
Parsons twIrled his eyeglasses, elevated them to
set his legs firmly, and read the following
statement to Justice Barrett:
The attention counsel called
ps to oss
sss the
pd to M to e% % % haSs m M s
last hs they supposed , hs any % sncn approaeh wsrs
hope .Ss, before de sS.1TRmsn 1S,I MonIsy
arsoss % oi'''S 70 Juror: W pS:ty
rEs5s0sr 9Es ass''Ss ss''t sass;:'a
% deprive iiiss lair trial whcn h. right i q
iS1 an % I IS i impossible perhaps.
sronnde.s q CHARGE when inpa,ss MI
or to he any here % s r2 % hi.
sseo,dlns p.sss.Csa y q: sS nss.isS
n I. eoSsro 20 NOT ose. publicity
e.: :,ss sSs:.. us:
occasion he VIOLATION @ Of Eha. regard ss hs rSs %
TN
Sharp TO fair and impartial trial now and here OF this most
ssSs! s .J,ss @ that sss
make re- ,o od Sr 20 mot ssss
.s ss % S! ss
sspT dssi .%' ;Ss.s s.
s:; e.?
s% sGnS wSsihsr should proceed lay matter
sSSs S.ss ue s
view Wna, had , 11a AN
BssnH done one Sprepsyy snpsT vim iSoss VINO la!s6s
is Judgment TO whether the entire facts shall now
coa, nDon DC what ne sSIned D,f S
supposed to he objection on the part OF MI sharp
ssss W: %
:aSps ne si Rs inquire
Hs9er Ss Xannsr rnssI f1Sh Ssins yS1t Ss Inquiry
done 70 SAn s results wa " %aS
9 s4ots nc: A: n:ss s 1s sl aa& 15
@ @ s GSnYS SS ,sG M
e sys sa 5, s4S ss % 5 70 IN rtSss
any saes matters think this is the propsT cssa'iop -
wsa am mn aSn s 1 e
ss ss c0% nave aoa. the Who
uDoG hum ra. Is ea.Sa's % ssIt e ey ss
action in Of their esa IEhts ,r fear IN so9.s
mat be might I';a sSs rS .s %sSn
not & Sss 10 sy o S
that mere & assertion M s, sa \ sns gTsass Ss Ss e case OF
Marine prepared 70 state exactly what has been
Mr PassonsIi object AND my to District
hs ASGnss meet 9sas siasensns ~hIes
hr matters were called 70 the attention
m.tsIs the nays %1 sGrs01y U . M
matter hat was called to my attention matter Of ens
EspRs Te me Tps pons %SS sa him
o I S, wos sy be tod % him. him
vantage sdvanisge naming G The Y SAN M % ne SSoi
Sn personally RuprIe have known nm some years
him 10 be AT an 1op ct rsRf1e whose
IKE next suggestion that made to me was made BY ss
third whose name was Smith % ,sner and wao came 10
me this is Ss S& s0%s
%
Who aud was asked to sSe smith isns 'ss
4ssPgcn tass TYcs Ms me told sa.s
snth G h'sSn ssnss, Taoa and
ss%C q s nm e &; he and @ sGs S% s
ss ss np II s%a fss S Ht While sa pay bin
Q for time Raymond said that there was no Oo a,e e,s
e sn'i ota msn snAt smith challenged the day
aeSt"msn ns nSa nss snsto" who
% M1; sns sSas sS,sSR Of i Julius IT 'ns csn
lin on oae%sn Of oa s jury
%Ss challenger Aa.r Mr. sat2n W.; S chad saa
ssssS sssSe n ro SSmSs Ss coar q
ySss nnS a9 on S , f 6sfor '
sSs' Ss 1t" s Rfr'SSe Ss "SSS Would D'%s S '
s was % Per'Sn Sna an person ss Whom he said
for one % ,S case to hun e dseu ae 70
' talk with aid "AsI , y0s s S tss
wei. c so you ns n9
Il sr tha Sofencef 20 He sa, In TIE lurybox seo
under the am not to sh wih you see
will, he challenged tomorrow" He was challenger on 'he
I'm 4
case of Mr. Kahnweier and that gentleman Ss sa1 ~
s. had been receiye.Oy hm ohors
re nps.iy Mr eler did not obey the nsruoons OF
court aud did bring these communications 10 you,
Honor have idea OF their character except wh sas
ne IN The pubc press certain 1t - that NE
40 anectsd Mr. Kahnwcler that he could 40 ohsei si
is This urybox your Honor after he explained 10 you
es 10 excuse him. A. ,,..oun a.
have spread this matter on the ree9 eco ~ navna
had II may be nat they a nn % te record
,nat be It. We do feel that ucr'
nnroner conduct charge IL ndiyi'ual Ms NJ
,hass facts given the name, OF VI" 10 rad n
hsIavc ne susceptible Of proof and we s,a
yonr Honor desires IT, 10 bring those hat snbiect may
ny end that whatever they may nave W 'S v" ~
st be reduced the form OF an OF